-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Apr 2006
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of the oropharyngeal leak pressure between the reusable Classic laryngeal mask airway and the single-use Soft Seal laryngeal mask airway.
- S J Hanning, T J McCulloch, B Orr, and S P Anderson.
- Department of Anaesthetics, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
- Anaesth Intensive Care. 2006 Apr 1;34(2):237-9.
AbstractWe tested the oropharyngeal leak pressure with the reusable laryngeal mask airway and the single-use Soft Seal laryngeal mask airway. These two types of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) have a similar design but the reusable LMA cuff is made from silicone whereas the Soft Seal LMA cuff is polyvinylchloride. Thirty-five healthy subjects were anaesthetized and paralyzed and the two types of Soft Seal LMA were compared in a blinded randomized cross-over trial. The oropharyngeal leak pressure was significantly higher with the Soft Seal than the reuable (21 +/- 7.6 and 16 +/- 6.7 cm H2O respectively, P = 0.002). However, in four subjects the oropharyngeal leak pressure was higher with the reusable by > 4 cm H2O. We concluded that the reusable LMA may provide a better seal in some individuals but that, on average, the Soft Seal provides a higher oropharyngeal leak pressure than the reusable LMA.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..